Europe has been very successful with their use of public toilets... NYC tried some that were exactly the same design once. People filed an ADA complaint that they weren't wheelchair accessible... but when made larger, they were used by prostitutes, drug dealers, drug addicts, and the homeless for all sorts of nefarious purposes, and they had to be done away with. IMHO, seems they could have had SOME that were ADA-compliant (funny--just noticed there's only a letter swap between that and complaint), and left the rest in place.

Perhaps so... but it wasn't like he was doing it on the job, and it should be your freedom to do or say whatever you like outside of work, so long as you don't do anything illegal. There are companies now who test for tobacco use and fire people who smoke, even in their own homes. I personally hate cigarettes and public smoking, but firing people because they smoke at home? Although I disagree with the idiot's rap music, he has the freedom of speech to make his crap music, and I feel it a bit unfair that he was fired over that, particularly seeing it was a government agency and not a private company that was his employer.

In what some describe as "ghetto-talk", "messed up" = committing a crime, and "a couple of people" = a minority. Context might help, but it won't help those who want to make a point regardless of the facts. ;)

It's the 522nd amendment: All rights of expression, entertainement (music, T.V., video games, internet, etc.), and liberty shall be sanctioned/removed if it is in violation of section Y-648 (encourages destuction of public property, killing of public officials, etc.). :p

I forgot which amendment it was that stated that all members of the subject general population are presumed guilty terrorists, while people with ethnic or religious identifier XYZ are presumed guilty super-terrorists until proven innocent. Can you help "re-educate" me? :D

Who's going to prison for Grand Theft Auto X? Oh.... I mean is ownership of a video game or its authorship on personal time now grounds for termination from employment too? :D

.....

I consider myself a staunch civil libertarian and see both sides of this issue. At the end of the day, I can't fault the TSA for terminating this individual's employment.

I happened to run across the blog of a conservative Canadian columnist (yes they exist ;) ) for the Edmonton Journal who, in discussing this, makes an analogy (yes, analogies are dangerous) to that of a teacher wanting to "separate" his evening pedophilia activities from his work:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?K6F03227B

While that comparison may be farfetched and unfair, as a grandparent and retired school administrator it resonates particularly with me. I also agree that it's worth of close scrutiny any time a government agency fires somebody for what he is saying or doing on his own time. For that reason alone, this thread has been very worthwhile reading. ^

It's about sex. Sex (and violence) sells. "Gangsta rap" .... one of those things I don't like, but it doesn't mean we should all follow Hamas and try to shut down the music or use it to create blacklists just because it talks about sex in repulsive ways.

What will be ironic is if this guy shows up permanently on some sort of blacklist the morning after taking Communion. :D

When hired, don't the TSA personnel have to pass any kind of background check, and sign an NDA for access to sensitive information? As part of most government jobs that require some kind of "responsibility" you agree to give up some of your citizen rights. One of these, AFAIK, is the right to advocate violent overthrow of the government. As such, he knew what he was getting into when he did this - no 1st amendment rights involved.

10 to 1, he wanted to be fired for the publicity it generated.

I would not be surprised if he wanted to be fired for the publicity. After all, he did say -- correctly -- that controversy sells.

Did he really advocate for the violent overthrow of the government or is that just another out-of-context claim?

At least you are consistent with your elocutions. The same line you used in threads two years ago.

Note to FTers: If you do not agree with GU, you follow the terrorist group Hamas.

.....

You do realize, of course, that incitement to violence is a crime.

Lead = male ejaculate, Head = oral sex, Plane = male sexual organ, building = female sexual area, and a whole litany of references to violent "sex"/sexual brutalization. His expressions don't seem contradictory to working airport security, where a variation of sexual groping is institutionalized and virtual peep shows are not to be discussed in "an endless debate on privacy" as the head of the Department of Homeland (In)Security puts it.

Music as an incitment to violence? Wow, I guess the French national anthem should be banned. :rolleyes:

A lot of things are a crime in some (or even a lot of) places. Or are we going to start prosecuting authors of novels and even children's books. After all, Rousseau warned us about stories for children. ;)

Since you're making analogies, I'll refer back to my earlier post, and suggest a better one would be a kindergarten teacher who is moonlighting by writing novels that include scenes of child sex. While he or she may not be guilty of any crime, I consider it a serious conflict with his or her "day job."